Assessment of Performance and Safety of an Asymmetric Balloon in the Treatment of Intranasal Bleeding Managed in an Emergency Setting (BATSI)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03912051|
Recruitment Status : Recruiting
First Posted : April 11, 2019
Last Update Posted : April 11, 2019
Between 10 and 12% of the general population suffers from epistaxis, out of which 10% would need to be medically managed. Most of patients treated for epistaxis are managed through emergency departments. The involvement of the ENT (ear, nose and throat) surgeon might be required in more complex situations in order to control bleeding.
Usually, nasal packing packing is used as a first line option after failure of digital compression. Epistaxis balloons are often used after failure of nasal packing Balloons are effective in approximately 60% of the patients with a rapid control of bleeding by compression followed by an absence of rebreeding after balloon removal.
The main challenges for patients treated with this device are i) pain upon balloon introduction and inflation ii) discomfort upon introduction in the nasal cavity as well as during balloon maintenance during 24 to 72 hours of tamponade iii) blood retention between distal and proximal balloons that favors infection iv) limited breathing capabilities through the nostrils which increases general discomfort v) negative aesthetic impact for the patient vi) septal and alar necrosis risk in case of prolonged compression.
Moreover, epistaxis leading to an hospitalization between 24 to 48h are not rare (>11 000 in France in 2017 according to ATIH). Those hospitalizations are often decided in order to ensure an optimal patient monitoring following packing or epistaxis balloon placement.
In order to address those adverse events while keeping the same efficacy and avoiding hospitalizations or reducing their duration, the use of an asymmetric, more physiological, easy to use and mainly intranasal (discreet proximal extremity) is studied.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Epistaxis||Device: asymmetric balloon||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||10 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Single Group Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||Assessment of Performance and Safety of an Asymmetric Balloon in the Treatment of Intranasal Bleeding Managed in an Emergency Setting|
|Actual Study Start Date :||March 28, 2019|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||June 30, 2019|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||July 31, 2019|
Experimental: asymmetric balloon
Asymmetric air filled (max 25 cc, Leur lock syringe) epistaxis balloon
Device: asymmetric balloon
Asymmetric balloon for treatment of intranasal bleeding
Other Name: epistaxis balloon
- Device performance [ Time Frame: 12 days ]Absence of bleeding following balloon inflation during first 48 hours and absence of rebreeding following removal at 48 hours and 9 days following removal
- Device safety [ Time Frame: 12 days ]Pain score on a VAS (Visual Analogic Scale)
- QoL [ Time Frame: 12 days ]RhinoQoL (Rhino Quality of Life) score
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT03912051
|Contact: Philippe Bastidefirstname.lastname@example.org|
|Strasbourg, Grand Est, France, 67000|
|Contact: Christian Debry, MD +33388128000 email@example.com|
|Principal Investigator:||Christian Debry, Pr||CHU Strasbourg (Univ Hosp Strasbourg)|